Shogun is the best tv series I have seen this year.
Just a good story, and there is actual unpredictable danger of leading characters. Nobody is safe.
And if "woke" stuff in modern tv / film (looks at Leon) something that really grinds your gears, there is none. No needless race or gender swapping characters, no Mary Sue girl bossing, no box ticking the character list to ensure it fits the awarding bodies criteria.
Where as Assassin Creed video game seems to have walked straight into this minefield with their future game set in a similar time period.
what channel /site is it on
Disney+ (but it was made by FX who obviously made great shows like Justified, Sons of Anarchy, The Shield). Its not like most of the Disney+ shitfest.
Cheers
It based on a book that is a fictionalised set of stories of a real guy. The actual real story is crazier than the fiction.
I recently watched a 2012 Russian adaptation of Bulgakov White Guard, on Prime, it managed the complexities of the civil war politics very well.
In the first episode the Hetmen in Kiev lose the support of the Germans, so call up the Ukrainian Nationalist for support because the Ukrainian Socialists are closing in. After that it gets messy.
It’s historically correct as the author was a White from Kiev, so it’s in part autobiographical. It also shows how complicated Ukraine actually is, as the Hetmen I think come from Ukrainian time in Polish Lithuanian empire, so not popular with Ukrainian nationals, but the socialist Petliura is not popular with the Whites who would rather have the Tsar back in Moscow and not a Ukraine republic. but as the Bolsheviks close in the Socialist turn to the poles for help.
How low the Tories have sunk..... shitting themselves about a man who has failed to be elected 7 times and is not popular in polling with voters to any eye catching extent. Utter Clowns.
He's about 25 points more popular with their own voters than Sunak!
Nah, not amongst current VI He's more popular with 2019 Tories as a whole though
I'm not so sure that, even after today's frenetic headlines, Reform will have much of an impact come polling day. They're essentially a one-man band supplemented by Lee Anderson. Tice has made no headway, personally, at all. What else have they got? Ann Widdecombe? Which also leads me to suggest that Reform is very much a 'laddish' party that is likely to have limited appeal to women voters (though I confess I haven't seen any male/female breakdown of support for Reform - it's just a gut feeling).
Not sure I agree with you there. Certainly the idea they have made no headway doesn't match reality. Just look at that MRP poll in the thread header. They are 6 points behind the Tories, 4 points ahead of gthe Lib Dems. I agree they might well fade over the next few weeks but Tice has overseen a substantial increase in their polling numbers which belies your 'no headway' claim.
MRP pollsters must be mildly annoyed to have dropped their polls on a day when there is some news that has genuine potential to shift the dynamic (not the phony so-called "gamechangers" we've had to date).
I'd had a strong assumption RefUK would fall away, but this makes it interesting and has potential to split the right wing vote in a catastrophic way for Sunak.
There are more YouGov MRPs to come so this will give them a nice benchmark against which to measure the Faragasm.
A lot to consider so just some immediate thoughts - the battle for third place in the popular (or less popular) vote seems to be tightening. While Reform are on 14% and four points ahead of the LDs with R&W, it's much closer with the other three polls - the YouGov MRP, Deltapoll and JL Partners. It may well be Farage's intervention will boost Reform - or it may not.
We know from the Clacton constituency poll the threat a Farage candidacy could have but the real message continues to be the collapse of the Conservative vote. In both the Clacton and the latter Godalming & Ash surveys, the Conservatives were down nearly a half on December 2019 - that ties in with a vote share of 25% in England.
I'm sceptical of MRP polls at this stage - even the ones taken in the last few days of the 2019 election were well out.
The more conventional polls remain all over the place to a degree - the Lab/LD/Green vs Con/Ref numbers tell a slightly different story.
R&W: 61-34, JL Partners 57-38, Deltapoll 62-34.
JL Partners still looks an outlier - James Johnson has put up an explanation as to why and how their numbers have changed so we'll see how this trend continues.
This is going to be a long month however you dress it up - it seems difficult to imagine the Conservative vote sinking into the teens but not inconceivable. Labour will of course take nothing for granted - they haven't got a single vote yet let alone a single seat.
Finally, it's worth repeating just because something has never happened doesn't mean it can't.
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
I am arguing that with a stable national population we would still need to increase the number of houses dramatically because if you look at national demographics our demographics are changing, yes.
Children typically live with their parents. Parents typically live with their children. (Great-) Grandparents typically don't live with either.
Even if our population numbers are stable, our demographics are not. People are living longer, we have more alive grandparents and great grandparents than ever before who are living in a house without any young people with them.
We need massive construction because of demographics alone.
Sounds like what we need is sheltered accommodation and care homes.
I'd expect demand for both to explode as the boomers start to get old enough to require them, yes. Social care, too - and we've probably now left it too late to reform until after the boomer bulge has passed.
This probably has major repercussions for local government finances over the next couple of decades.
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
A lot of the increase in housing demand post WW2 has been driven by changes in lifestyle separate to any immigration issues. People mrrying later, divorce, kids wanting independence and the growth in second home ownership have all had a substantial impact on housing demand.
They all play a role but people living longer than they did in the past absolutely dwarfs all of that.
Either way though, we need massively more houses which can only be done with a huge increase in construction. Even if there's no migration.
I remember a few years ago one of the Radio 4 science/maths programmes pointing out that UK life expectancy had increased by 2 days for every week that has passed since WW2. I think that might have faltered slighty in recent times but is still a remarkable improvement.
Talking of down with the kids, Trump has joined the TikyTok. Has 4.5 million followers in 2 days. Yes the same social media platform he wanted to ban a few years ago.
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
I am arguing that with a stable national population we would still need to increase the number of houses dramatically because if you look at national demographics our demographics are changing, yes.
Children typically live with their parents. Parents typically live with their children. (Great-) Grandparents typically don't live with either.
Even if our population numbers are stable, our demographics are not. People are living longer, we have more alive grandparents and great grandparents than ever before who are living in a house without any young people with them.
We need massive construction because of demographics alone.
Sounds like what we need is sheltered accommodation and care homes.
Should people who are fit, healthy and able to live in their own home but are simply old be forced into sheltered accommodation in your eyes?
Goodwins loser polling says Exclusive polling from People Polling for GB News: Labour - 46 per cent Conservatives - 22 per cent Reform - 10 per cent Liberal Democrats - 8 per cent Green - 8 per cent
Looks pretty much like the other polls despite the fact it’s from Loser Goodwin.
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
I am arguing that with a stable national population we would still need to increase the number of houses dramatically because if you look at national demographics our demographics are changing, yes.
Children typically live with their parents. Parents typically live with their children. (Great-) Grandparents typically don't live with either.
Even if our population numbers are stable, our demographics are not. People are living longer, we have more alive grandparents and great grandparents than ever before who are living in a house without any young people with them.
We need massive construction because of demographics alone.
Sounds like what we need is sheltered accommodation and care homes.
Should people who are fit, healthy and able to live in their own home but are simply old be forced into sheltered accommodation in your eyes?
I suspect a lot of people would be better off long term if they moved to sheltered accommodation sooner rather than later..
A lot of people leave things 1 or 2 years too late…
Shogun is the best tv series I have seen this year.
Just a good story, and there is actual unpredictable danger of leading characters. Nobody is safe.
And if "woke" stuff in modern tv / film (looks at Leon) something that really grinds your gears, there is none. No needless race or gender swapping characters, no Mary Sue girl bossing, no box ticking the character list to ensure it fits the awarding bodies criteria.
Where as Assassin Creed video game seems to have walked straight into this minefield with their future game set in a similar time period.
what channel /site is it on
Disney+ (but it was made by FX who obviously made great shows like Justified, Sons of Anarchy, The Shield). Its not like most of the Disney+ shitfest.
Cheers
It based on a book that is a fictionalised set of stories of a real guy. The actual real story is crazier than the fiction.
I recently watched a 2012 Russian adaptation of Bulgakov White Guard, on Prime, it managed the complexities of the civil war politics very well.
In the first episode the Hetmen in Kiev lose the support of the Germans, so call up the Ukrainian Nationalist for support because the Ukrainian Socialists are closing in. After that it gets messy.
It’s historically correct as the author was a White from Kiev, so it’s in part autobiographical. It also shows how complicated Ukraine actually is, as the Hetmen I think come from Ukrainian time in Polish Lithuanian empire, so not popular with Ukrainian nationals, but the socialist Petliura is not popular with the Whites who would rather have the Tsar back in Moscow and not a Ukraine republic. but as the Bolsheviks close in the Socialist turn to the poles for help.
Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth, rather than empire. Though it was a commonwealth of the aristocracies - and what is now Ukraine had none.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 23m Tory campaign is on the brink of complete collapse tonight.
Dan Hodges just goes for the laziest take possible. I think I trust the political judgement of everyone on PB over Hodges' latest bandwagon tweets.
He’s overly dramatic . We’ve still got the manifestos to come and there’s a month to go . A lot can happen.
All of it bad for the Tories...
Very funny !
I still think the Tories will recover somewhat .
We're almost a third of the way into the campaign - at this point, I think they might consider themselves lucky if they recover to the polling position of two weeks ago!
Seems the grown ups are having an evening off editing the BBC News front page. Major stories on meme stocks, Sidemen reality tv shows and a raisin found up a toddlers nose. Its like reading the Sun.
That’s what it’s always like nowadays, I’m afraid to say
And by tomorrow, Eminem record label will have it pulled down for copyright infringement and make a statement about inclusivity and diversity and their values not at all aligned with Farage....and then Farage can make a big song and dance about DEI.
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
I am arguing that with a stable national population we would still need to increase the number of houses dramatically because if you look at national demographics our demographics are changing, yes.
Children typically live with their parents. Parents typically live with their children. (Great-) Grandparents typically don't live with either.
Even if our population numbers are stable, our demographics are not. People are living longer, we have more alive grandparents and great grandparents than ever before who are living in a house without any young people with them.
We need massive construction because of demographics alone.
Sounds like what we need is sheltered accommodation and care homes.
Should people who are fit, healthy and able to live in their own home but are simply old be forced into sheltered accommodation in your eyes?
I suspect a lot of people would be better off long term if they moved to sheltered accommodation sooner rather than later..
A lot of people leave things 1 or 2 years too late…
Some, maybe.
While a lot of other people are fit and better off in their own home.
And we're talking a difference of many decades in most cases between kids leaving home and being old enough to require a care home. I suspect most people who live in care homes today, their own grandchildren are old enough to require their own homes.
I'm not so sure that, even after today's frenetic headlines, Reform will have much of an impact come polling day. They're essentially a one-man band supplemented by Lee Anderson. Tice has made no headway, personally, at all. What else have they got? Ann Widdecombe? Which also leads me to suggest that Reform is very much a 'laddish' party that is likely to have limited appeal to women voters (though I confess I haven't seen any male/female breakdown of support for Reform - it's just a gut feeling).
Is the Moggster's sister standing for the ReFukkers? Against her bro would be entertaining.
Annie's back in the Tory fold now, part of Truss's PopCon faction.
I'm sick and tired of pop corn! Oh, you said PopCon?
Off topic: Those interested in Boeing's failures may want to read a long article in yesterday's Seattle Times, by Dominic Gates, who has been covering Boeing approximately forever. (And well, as far as I can tell.) Gates has much from a senior quality control engineer, Martin Bickeboller, who is quitting (and suing Boeing). In his first 27 years with the company, the engineer's lawyer says his devotion to safety never conflicted with his loyalty to Boeing, but then things changed, gradually.
(No link, since I have the dead tree version.)
Article is paywalled, but here are excerpts:
Seattle Times ($) - Boeing whistleblower has waited a decade for change, now expects to leave
For senior Boeing engineer and whistleblower Martin Bickeböller, a 37-year career at the jet maker is coming to a frustrating end.
For a decade, in complaints filed internally at Boeing as well as with the Federal Aviation Administration and Congress, Bickeböller documented significant shortfalls in Boeing’s quality control management at suppliers that build major sections of the 787 Dreamliner.
The FAA substantiated his claims in complaints in 2014 and 2021 and required Boeing to take corrective action. His latest complaint, submitted in January, alleges Boeing has not properly implemented the fixes it committed to after those earlier complaints.
Bickeböller doesn’t point to a single safety issue but rather to a systemically flawed oversight process.
He asserts that Boeing lacks control of the manufacturing processes at its suppliers to the extent that it cannot ensure — as safety regulations require — that every plane delivered meets design specifications.
On Thursday, Boeing presented a plan to the FAA for a comprehensive overhaul of its management of safety and quality. Bickeböller’s allegations suggest the necessary changes will have to reach deep into Boeing’s quality control systems throughout the supply chain.
And Bickeböller’s perception that he’s been penalized for his complaints underlines the difficulty of Boeing’s current effort to encourage employees to speak up about safety issues. . . .
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
I am arguing that with a stable national population we would still need to increase the number of houses dramatically because if you look at national demographics our demographics are changing, yes.
Children typically live with their parents. Parents typically live with their children. (Great-) Grandparents typically don't live with either.
Even if our population numbers are stable, our demographics are not. People are living longer, we have more alive grandparents and great grandparents than ever before who are living in a house without any young people with them.
We need massive construction because of demographics alone.
Sounds like what we need is sheltered accommodation and care homes.
Should people who are fit, healthy and able to live in their own home but are simply old be forced into sheltered accommodation in your eyes?
I suspect a lot of people would be better off long term if they moved to sheltered accommodation sooner rather than later..
A lot of people leave things 1 or 2 years too late…
Sheltered accomodation yes. But not care homes. As I mentioned last week I have seen the inside of a lot of (don't) care homes over the years and I would do everything in my power to prevent my loved ones going into one.
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
I am arguing that with a stable national population we would still need to increase the number of houses dramatically because if you look at national demographics our demographics are changing, yes.
Children typically live with their parents. Parents typically live with their children. (Great-) Grandparents typically don't live with either.
Even if our population numbers are stable, our demographics are not. People are living longer, we have more alive grandparents and great grandparents than ever before who are living in a house without any young people with them.
We need massive construction because of demographics alone.
Sounds like what we need is sheltered accommodation and care homes.
Should people who are fit, healthy and able to live in their own home but are simply old be forced into sheltered accommodation in your eyes?
I suspect a lot of people would be better off long term if they moved to sheltered accommodation sooner rather than later..
A lot of people leave things 1 or 2 years too late…
Yes - I think it can be based on a vanity, and an unwillingness to look in the mirror. And there is a far greater range of types of sheltered, or semi-sheltered accommodation available over the last 25 years. It's easily to get shafted when it is sold on if purchased, however.
We had a different version of that issue.
Dad declared he was going to die in the (quite isolated) house he and mum had renovated and been in for 35 years. And he did.
Which then took us 18 months to clear - it was big enough he never had to throw anything away. And a further 18 months to sell (2012-3).
So mum moved with me as 'carer' into a place within walking distance of everything needed, which served her well and I will be keeping it as I have long term diabetic complications to consider, which could potentially include impaired vision / mobility.
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
I am arguing that with a stable national population we would still need to increase the number of houses dramatically because if you look at national demographics our demographics are changing, yes.
Children typically live with their parents. Parents typically live with their children. (Great-) Grandparents typically don't live with either.
Even if our population numbers are stable, our demographics are not. People are living longer, we have more alive grandparents and great grandparents than ever before who are living in a house without any young people with them.
We need massive construction because of demographics alone.
Sounds like what we need is sheltered accommodation and care homes.
Should people who are fit, healthy and able to live in their own home but are simply old be forced into sheltered accommodation in your eyes?
I suspect a lot of people would be better off long term if they moved to sheltered accommodation sooner rather than later..
A lot of people leave things 1 or 2 years too late…
Sheltered accomodation yes. But not care homes. As I mentioned last week I have seen the inside of a lot of (don't) care homes over the years and I would do everything in my power to prevent my loved ones going into one.
It'll be much better when it's a bunch of conscripted 18 year olds giving the care.
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
I am arguing that with a stable national population we would still need to increase the number of houses dramatically because if you look at national demographics our demographics are changing, yes.
Children typically live with their parents. Parents typically live with their children. (Great-) Grandparents typically don't live with either.
Even if our population numbers are stable, our demographics are not. People are living longer, we have more alive grandparents and great grandparents than ever before who are living in a house without any young people with them.
We need massive construction because of demographics alone.
Sounds like what we need is sheltered accommodation and care homes.
Should people who are fit, healthy and able to live in their own home but are simply old be forced into sheltered accommodation in your eyes?
I suspect a lot of people would be better off long term if they moved to sheltered accommodation sooner rather than later..
A lot of people leave things 1 or 2 years too late…
Sheltered accomodation yes. But not care homes. As I mentioned last week I have seen the inside of a lot of (don't) care homes over the years and I would do everything in my power to prevent my loved ones going into one.
I suspect (although this is anecdotal rather than statistical) that people in sheltered accommodation are less likely to end up in care homes….
How low the Tories have sunk..... shitting themselves about a man who has failed to be elected 7 times and is not popular in polling with voters to any eye catching extent. Utter Clowns.
Prediction: Farage is yesterday's news and won't shift the dial for Reform very much, even if he does stand and win in Clacton.
That's just a quirk of statistical modeling. Really hard to deal with a wildcard. See also Ashfield and the seats that were East Devon, where there were significant independents last time.
How low the Tories have sunk..... shitting themselves about a man who has failed to be elected 7 times and is not popular in polling with voters to any eye catching extent. Utter Clowns.
Prediction: Farage is yesterday's news and won't shift the dial for Reform very much, even if he does stand and win in Clacton.
This is what my gut says too.
The person sinking the Tories is Sunak, as today's JL poll shows. People really do not like him when they learn more about him.
How low the Tories have sunk..... shitting themselves about a man who has failed to be elected 7 times and is not popular in polling with voters to any eye catching extent. Utter Clowns.
Prediction: Farage is yesterday's news and won't shift the dial for Reform very much, even if he does stand and win in Clacton.
For once, I'm inclined to agree. Or maybe it's just hopium from both of us.
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
I am arguing that with a stable national population we would still need to increase the number of houses dramatically because if you look at national demographics our demographics are changing, yes.
Children typically live with their parents. Parents typically live with their children. (Great-) Grandparents typically don't live with either.
Even if our population numbers are stable, our demographics are not. People are living longer, we have more alive grandparents and great grandparents than ever before who are living in a house without any young people with them.
We need massive construction because of demographics alone.
Sounds like what we need is sheltered accommodation and care homes.
Should people who are fit, healthy and able to live in their own home but are simply old be forced into sheltered accommodation in your eyes?
I suspect a lot of people would be better off long term if they moved to sheltered accommodation sooner rather than later..
A lot of people leave things 1 or 2 years too late…
Sheltered accomodation yes. But not care homes. As I mentioned last week I have seen the inside of a lot of (don't) care homes over the years and I would do everything in my power to prevent my loved ones going into one.
It'll be much better when it's a bunch of conscripted 18 year olds giving the care.
I wonder if it could be any worse. At least they might have a twang of conscience about letting those in their care starve to death.
Seems the grown ups are having an evening off editing the BBC News front page. Major stories on meme stocks, Sidemen reality tv shows and a raisin found up a toddlers nose. Its like reading the Sun.
That’s what it’s always like nowadays, I’m afraid to say
Yes, it’s serial garbage. Sky, C4 and even ITV News are superior. The morning coverage is the worst: it’s like reading a village newsletter at times.
I think this is correct. When Starmer fails - what will replace his administration?
Luke Tryl @LukeTryl · 1h Obviously many will think existential threat to the Tories a good thing & many problems are of their own making. A caution though is careful what you wish for. I think many of those most happy at a Tory implosion would dislike more the potential options for what replaces it
That would be very disappointing for them both, but epically so for Galloway. Corbyn is looking to draw on a personal vote, but Galloway seemed to believe (or to appear to believe) that his by-election win presaged some epic realignment.
How low the Tories have sunk..... shitting themselves about a man who has failed to be elected 7 times and is not popular in polling with voters to any eye catching extent. Utter Clowns.
Prediction: Farage is yesterday's news and won't shift the dial for Reform very much, even if he does stand and win in Clacton.
Yeah I can see a case for suggesting that Farage will cause a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.
And it’s one of those uncanny valley items where the picture just looks but you can’t quite work out why until it’s pointed out
How is this happening? Is somebody inside CCHQ a Labour plant?
Well Labour put out one with spelling mistakes. You just can't get the staff these days. I blame it on all those mickey mouse degrees ;-)
What is very strange is when we think about Sunak launch for leadership, it was super slick. The criticism was it was too slick and there were media pieces about his PR team all being very clever and savvy. And then people saw him in person in the debates and he was shit.
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
I am arguing that with a stable national population we would still need to increase the number of houses dramatically because if you look at national demographics our demographics are changing, yes.
Children typically live with their parents. Parents typically live with their children. (Great-) Grandparents typically don't live with either.
Even if our population numbers are stable, our demographics are not. People are living longer, we have more alive grandparents and great grandparents than ever before who are living in a house without any young people with them.
We need massive construction because of demographics alone.
Sounds like what we need is sheltered accommodation and care homes.
I'd expect demand for both to explode as the boomers start to get old enough to require them, yes. Social care, too - and we've probably now left it too late to reform until after the boomer bulge has passed.
This probably has major repercussions for local government finances over the next couple of decades.
Sheltered accommodation and care homes are already huge industries.
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
I am arguing that with a stable national population we would still need to increase the number of houses dramatically because if you look at national demographics our demographics are changing, yes.
Children typically live with their parents. Parents typically live with their children. (Great-) Grandparents typically don't live with either.
Even if our population numbers are stable, our demographics are not. People are living longer, we have more alive grandparents and great grandparents than ever before who are living in a house without any young people with them.
We need massive construction because of demographics alone.
Sounds like what we need is sheltered accommodation and care homes.
Should people who are fit, healthy and able to live in their own home but are simply old be forced into sheltered accommodation in your eyes?
I suspect a lot of people would be better off long term if they moved to sheltered accommodation sooner rather than later..
A lot of people leave things 1 or 2 years too late…
Sheltered accomodation yes. But not care homes. As I mentioned last week I have seen the inside of a lot of (don't) care homes over the years and I would do everything in my power to prevent my loved ones going into one.
I would just comment that we have lived in our home for 48 years and the youngest of our 3 children was just 18 months old when we moved in
It is the family home and is far too big for us, but we will not move from it and indeed our children and grandchildren would do whatever they could to keep us in our home
Someday, maybe soon, a life changing event will happen to my wife and I, but even then it is possible our youngest may buy his siblings out and continue it as the family home
How low the Tories have sunk..... shitting themselves about a man who has failed to be elected 7 times and is not popular in polling with voters to any eye catching extent. Utter Clowns.
Prediction: Farage is yesterday's news and won't shift the dial for Reform very much, even if he does stand and win in Clacton.
That would probably be the funniest outcome, in that it would mean he did not gain any significant influence for Reform but was now expected to endure the slog of being a backbench MP - unless you go full O'Mara even the lazier ones have to do a lot of mundane things.
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
I am arguing that with a stable national population we would still need to increase the number of houses dramatically because if you look at national demographics our demographics are changing, yes.
Children typically live with their parents. Parents typically live with their children. (Great-) Grandparents typically don't live with either.
Even if our population numbers are stable, our demographics are not. People are living longer, we have more alive grandparents and great grandparents than ever before who are living in a house without any young people with them.
We need massive construction because of demographics alone.
Sounds like what we need is sheltered accommodation and care homes.
Should people who are fit, healthy and able to live in their own home but are simply old be forced into sheltered accommodation in your eyes?
I suspect a lot of people would be better off long term if they moved to sheltered accommodation sooner rather than later..
A lot of people leave things 1 or 2 years too late…
Sheltered accomodation yes. But not care homes. As I mentioned last week I have seen the inside of a lot of (don't) care homes over the years and I would do everything in my power to prevent my loved ones going into one.
I suspect (although this is anecdotal rather than statistical) that people in sheltered accommodation are less likely to end up in care homes….
I suspect it varies dramatically from individual to individual.
My grandad passed earlier this year, he was still living in his own home until 93 and was fit and healthy (for a 93 year old) until he suddenly deteriorated very fast. Cancer we're pretty certain but by the time it was discovered he was too frail to have a biopsy.
He never needed one, even in his nineties, but others can need one in their sixties or seventies. There's no hard and fast rules.
I don't understand who'd vote for the Tories? If you like the right wing rhetoric you'd look at the Tory Party's record immigration and culture war capitulation and go for Reform (this is before you factor in the fact that Farage is far better at speeches).
If you don't like the rhetoric you're going LD or Lab.
Yep, right-wing rhetoric mixed with centrist policies is a recipe for electoral disaster. Pleases no-one.
I really think we should start to consider that the polls will not narrow.
Sunak should have called the election as soon as he took over. In hindsight Johnson should have gone in summer 2021...
(Actually less hindsight for one @CorrectHorseBattery who called the peak of Johnsonism)
The peak of Johnsonism was fairly obviously the day after the Hartlepool by-election. He should have called another general election then, despite it being less than 2 years since the previous one.
I think this is correct. When Starmer fails - what will replace his administration?
Luke Tryl @LukeTryl · 1h Obviously many will think existential threat to the Tories a good thing & many problems are of their own making. A caution though is careful what you wish for. I think many of those most happy at a Tory implosion would dislike more the potential options for what replaces it
How low the Tories have sunk..... shitting themselves about a man who has failed to be elected 7 times and is not popular in polling with voters to any eye catching extent. Utter Clowns.
Prediction: Farage is yesterday's news and won't shift the dial for Reform very much, even if he does stand and win in Clacton.
I'm unsure on that one - one one hand you have a hugely attention grabbing strong orator who Tory voters like against an internally unpopular failure of a politician who is just a campaigning horror show having to defend 14 years of failure. It may not happen, but the conditions are right for things to go very wrong for the Tories.
That would be very disappointing for them both, but epically so for Galloway. Corbyn is looking to draw on a personal vote, but Galloway seemed to believe (or to appear to believe) that his by-election win presaged some epic realignment.
There's zero chance Galloway loses his deposit. He has a reasonable chance of holding the seat
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Nobody in that age group would be impacted by it.
Speak to them about it though. They hate the idea. They don't like being told that their degrees are "Mickey Mouse" either.
Interesting you should talk about a Micky Mouse degree. They interviewed someone from Bristol about their BA course in Circus Arts.
I loved the idea!
We can't all be ballroom dancers
They take this stuff more seriously in France. My neighbour over there had a clowning degree having studied under the great someone or other at some elite clowning academy.
Shogun is the best tv series I have seen this year.
Just a good story, and there is actual unpredictable danger of leading characters. Nobody is safe.
And if "woke" stuff in modern tv / film (looks at Leon) something that really grinds your gears, there is none. No needless race or gender swapping characters, no Mary Sue girl bossing, no box ticking the character list to ensure it fits the awarding bodies criteria.
Where as Assassin Creed video game seems to have walked straight into this minefield with their future game set in a similar time period.
what channel /site is it on
Disney+ (but it was made by FX who obviously made great shows like Justified, Sons of Anarchy, The Shield). Its not like most of the Disney+ shitfest.
Cheers
It based on a book that is a fictionalised set of stories of a real guy. The actual real story is crazier than the fiction.
I recently watched a 2012 Russian adaptation of Bulgakov White Guard, on Prime, it managed the complexities of the civil war politics very well.
In the first episode the Hetmen in Kiev lose the support of the Germans, so call up the Ukrainian Nationalist for support because the Ukrainian Socialists are closing in. After that it gets messy.
It’s historically correct as the author was a White from Kiev, so it’s in part autobiographical. It also shows how complicated Ukraine actually is, as the Hetmen I think come from Ukrainian time in Polish Lithuanian empire, so not popular with Ukrainian nationals, but the socialist Petliura is not popular with the Whites who would rather have the Tsar back in Moscow and not a Ukraine republic. but as the Bolsheviks close in the Socialist turn to the poles for help.
Just in general terms, first hand accounts aren't necessarily historically correct. Participants often give the most biased accounts of all.
How low the Tories have sunk..... shitting themselves about a man who has failed to be elected 7 times and is not popular in polling with voters to any eye catching extent. Utter Clowns.
Prediction: Farage is yesterday's news and won't shift the dial for Reform very much, even if he does stand and win in Clacton.
That would probably be the funniest outcome, in that it would mean he did not gain any significant influence for Reform but was now expected to endure the slog of being a backbench MP - unless you go full O'Mara even the lazier ones have to do a lot of mundane things.
Suspect that Nigel Farage MP might just give I.T Trebitsch Lincoln MP and Horatio Bottomley a run for their (or rather, others') money.
How low the Tories have sunk..... shitting themselves about a man who has failed to be elected 7 times and is not popular in polling with voters to any eye catching extent. Utter Clowns.
Prediction: Farage is yesterday's news and won't shift the dial for Reform very much, even if he does stand and win in Clacton.
I suspect the biggest effect might be to make the CCHQ campaign team panic, which could result in further missteps becoming more likely.
Tory candidates would be well advised to ignore them, keep their heads down, and concentrate on working their own patch as hard as they can.
If you were Farage would you want to win in Clacton?
South Thanet 2015 was a perfect result for him, close loss, he could argue that he would have won if the Tory machine hadn't cheated. But if he gets elected, then he'll be stuck at Westminster in the most depressing of positions, an opposition backbencher, he'll have to do constituency surgeries, actually handle people's problems. That doesn't sound like Farage stuff to me.
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
I am arguing that with a stable national population we would still need to increase the number of houses dramatically because if you look at national demographics our demographics are changing, yes.
Children typically live with their parents. Parents typically live with their children. (Great-) Grandparents typically don't live with either.
Even if our population numbers are stable, our demographics are not. People are living longer, we have more alive grandparents and great grandparents than ever before who are living in a house without any young people with them.
We need massive construction because of demographics alone.
Sounds like what we need is sheltered accommodation and care homes.
Should people who are fit, healthy and able to live in their own home but are simply old be forced into sheltered accommodation in your eyes?
I suspect a lot of people would be better off long term if they moved to sheltered accommodation sooner rather than later..
A lot of people leave things 1 or 2 years too late…
Sheltered accomodation yes. But not care homes. As I mentioned last week I have seen the inside of a lot of (don't) care homes over the years and I would do everything in my power to prevent my loved ones going into one.
I would just comment that we have lived in our home for 48 years and the youngest of our 3 children was just 18 months old when we moved in
It is the family home and is far too big for us, but we will not move from it and indeed our children and grandchildren would do whatever they could to keep us in our home
Someday, maybe soon, a life changing event will happen to my wife and I, but even then it is possible our youngest may buy his siblings out and continue it as the family home
There's absolutely nothing wrong with you continuing to live in your family home, good for you. But other people also need family homes and that means we need massive construction, even without any population changes just due to demographic changes.
Do you mind if I ask how many years ago it was when your last child moved out of the home? Unlike in the past its not unusual now for people to live in what was their family home for decades beyond their children no longer living there and we need construction for the children to have somewhere to live.
Jesus wept! The Deltapoll has VI for 18 to 24 yo of 81% for Labour!!
Natty Serves proving popular....
Reform should look at some of the policies that parties on the continent are using to attract younger voters and try to outflank the Tories.
That is one way that we are unlike our continental neighbours. Our youngsters are on the other side of this Tory culture war, particularly the women. Reform is the only party in Britain with even worse age demographics than the Tories. Its double or quits on a losing hand.
In part I think it that migration to Britain is 75 years old, but much more recent on the continent, so our youngsters have always known it, and our communities less segregated. Partly it is much lower unemployment particularly amongst the young.
All the polling confirms this. Britons are one of the least racist nations in Europe, and numbers citing immigration as an issue much lower than old codgers like @Leon, or indeed the PB Median.
Older liberals equating opposition to immigration with racism is quite self-serving because their financial interests are served by importing workers, but the financial interests of the young are different.
I don't think you're right on the history either. There was post-war immigration to France, Germany, the Netherlands, etc, as well. What was unique about the UK was the fairly long period from the late 1960s to the late 1990s when net migration was around zero and it became a fringe issue.
As much as you try to blame the younger generations problems on migration, that is bullshit. Our population is growing at a very slow rate compared to historical norms.
The problem is the lack of construction, not migration.
Especially since even without migration we'd still need construction that we aren't getting anyway.
A family of 4 moving into the country only need one house between them. 6 grandchildren growing up and becoming adults require 6 houses between them.
In the past decade our over 50s population has grown (net) by more than net migration. That's the real main reason why we need so many more houses
Are you arguing that with a stable national population, we would still need to increase the number of houses exponentially because if you look at an individual nuclear family, there are more grandkids than kids?
I am arguing that with a stable national population we would still need to increase the number of houses dramatically because if you look at national demographics our demographics are changing, yes.
Children typically live with their parents. Parents typically live with their children. (Great-) Grandparents typically don't live with either.
Even if our population numbers are stable, our demographics are not. People are living longer, we have more alive grandparents and great grandparents than ever before who are living in a house without any young people with them.
We need massive construction because of demographics alone.
Sounds like what we need is sheltered accommodation and care homes.
Should people who are fit, healthy and able to live in their own home but are simply old be forced into sheltered accommodation in your eyes?
I suspect a lot of people would be better off long term if they moved to sheltered accommodation sooner rather than later..
A lot of people leave things 1 or 2 years too late…
Yes - I think it can be based on a vanity, and an unwillingness to look in the mirror. And there is a far greater range of types of sheltered, or semi-sheltered accommodation available over the last 25 years. It's easily to get shafted when it is sold on if purchased, however.
We had a different version of that issue.
Dad declared he was going to die in the (quite isolated) house he and mum had renovated and been in for 35 years. And he did.
Which then took us 18 months to clear - it was big enough he never had to throw anything away. And a further 18 months to sell (2012-3).
So mum moved with me as 'carer' into a place within walking distance of everything needed, which served her well and I will be keeping it as I have long term diabetic complications to consider, which could potentially include impaired vision / mobility.
What I need is a 2nd home on the coast :-).
I can sympathise. My family had been in one home for a century, and my father was just like yours. Just the gardening and DIY chemicals took two large estate car trips to the council depot, and that was before I realised where to find the cleaning chemicals, including some 0.880 ammonia with the rubber cap disintegrating (that went into a bucket of water with old malt vinegar to titration, then down the drain with lots of water). The Men's Shed came for several trips with cars and trailers to take their pick of timber and tools and anything else. The local folk who grwo pot plants for charity came and collected hundreds of unused plant pots. And so on and so forth.
Very fortunately everything in the house - plumbing, roof, carpets, kitchen ... outlasted him by about a year, too.
If you were Farage would you want to win in Clacton?
South Thanet 2015 was a perfect result for him, close loss, he could argue that he would have won if the Tory machine hadn't cheated. But if he gets elected, then he'll be stuck at Westminster in the most depressing of positions, an opposition backbencher, he'll have to do constituency surgeries, actually handle people's problems. That doesn't sound like Farage stuff to me.
He won't do surgeries, and MPs are under no obligation to do them. He'll have a shitty attendance record and he'll be constantly swanning around with the latest fash-flavoured politicians in whichever country has most recently voted 17% far right. He'll be in the country less than Leon.
That would be very disappointing for them both, but epically so for Galloway. Corbyn is looking to draw on a personal vote, but Galloway seemed to believe (or to appear to believe) that his by-election win presaged some epic realignment.
There's zero chance Galloway loses his deposit. He has a reasonable chance of holding the seat
That would be very disappointing for them both, but epically so for Galloway. Corbyn is looking to draw on a personal vote, but Galloway seemed to believe (or to appear to believe) that his by-election win presaged some epic realignment.
There's zero chance Galloway loses his deposit. He has a reasonable chance of holding the seat
He got 12k in a protest vote at a low turnout by election. Labour have picked someone who isn't a tin foil hat lunatic from Blackburn, so decent chance of retaking the seat.
On a serious note, these guys are from very privileged world. You can see why Cameron hired Coulson, an Essex lad from a normal background to tell him what to order at a Nandos.
That would be very disappointing for them both, but epically so for Galloway. Corbyn is looking to draw on a personal vote, but Galloway seemed to believe (or to appear to believe) that his by-election win presaged some epic realignment.
3% would be spectacular, and amusing.
Another way to look at it is that Gorgeous got just over twelve thousand votes in the by election. Unlike normal party candidates, it's not easy seeing him get more than that in a general election. And that's not enough to win.
If you were Farage would you want to win in Clacton?
South Thanet 2015 was a perfect result for him, close loss, he could argue that he would have won if the Tory machine hadn't cheated. But if he gets elected, then he'll be stuck at Westminster in the most depressing of positions, an opposition backbencher, he'll have to do constituency surgeries, actually handle people's problems. That doesn't sound like Farage stuff to me.
It never bothered him not doing his job when he was in Brussels.
Love The Way You Lie is the title to an Eminem track that best sums up Farage’s appeal to his knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing, window-licking acolytes.
If you were Farage would you want to win in Clacton?
South Thanet 2015 was a perfect result for him, close loss, he could argue that he would have won if the Tory machine hadn't cheated. But if he gets elected, then he'll be stuck at Westminster in the most depressing of positions, an opposition backbencher, he'll have to do constituency surgeries, actually handle people's problems. That doesn't sound like Farage stuff to me.
Depends how big the win is. If he manages to manufacture a 3-4 swing from the Tories to RFM then he's got 5 years of fun trying to replace the Tories. After Sunak stands down there's a strong chance he'll be by far the most prominent right wing politicians in the UK above even the Tory leader. I'm also not convinced Labour's support is that deep - I think it comes more from GTTO than genuine enthusiasm, in which case there could be another very swingy election in the future.
As for constituency surgeries and the like, who's going to punish them for outsourcing it?
How low the Tories have sunk..... shitting themselves about a man who has failed to be elected 7 times and is not popular in polling with voters to any eye catching extent. Utter Clowns.
Prediction: Farage is yesterday's news and won't shift the dial for Reform very much, even if he does stand and win in Clacton.
I suspect the biggest effect might be to make the CCHQ campaign team panic, which could result in further missteps becoming more likely.
Tory candidates would be well advised to ignore them, keep their heads down, and concentrate on working their own patch as hard as they can.
Good advice, which they almost certainly won't take.
That would be very disappointing for them both, but epically so for Galloway. Corbyn is looking to draw on a personal vote, but Galloway seemed to believe (or to appear to believe) that his by-election win presaged some epic realignment.
There's zero chance Galloway loses his deposit. He has a reasonable chance of holding the seat
He got 12k in a protest vote at a low turnout by election. Labour have picked someone who isn't a tin foil hat lunatic from Blackburn, so decent chance of retaking the seat.
Yes, a decent chance, but Galloway on 3% in the MRP is for the birds.
I said earlier this was great news for the LibDems:
Tories have been tacking hard right to see off RefUK. Thought they had caught the Nigel on the hop. Tory campaign heavily set in winning over Fukkers and wayward Tories. Forget your common or garden Tory, and especially forget your 2019 first time red wall Tory, this is hang em and flog em only. Various mad policy announcements have gone down like a bucke of warm sick - National Service a prime example. Despite this that Tory chasm remains gargantuan. It isn't working Now The Nigel (for it is He) comes back. On a mission to become the next leader of the Conservative Party. Sunak in a mad panic will now try and tack even harder to the right to see him off. The madder the Tories get, the harder they lose. They can't out fUK RefUK, and in trying they lose even more of middle England.
And this is why the Nigel is manna from heaven for the Liberal Democrats. The Tories will unveil ever madder and more repugnant policies over the remaining month, and that just lets us pick up more seats.
How low the Tories have sunk..... shitting themselves about a man who has failed to be elected 7 times and is not popular in polling with voters to any eye catching extent. Utter Clowns.
Prediction: Farage is yesterday's news and won't shift the dial for Reform very much, even if he does stand and win in Clacton.
I suspect the biggest effect might be to make the CCHQ campaign team panic, which could result in further missteps becoming more likely.
Tory candidates would be well advised to ignore them, keep their heads down, and concentrate on working their own patch as hard as they can.
Good advice, which they almost certainly won't take.
Comments
I still think the Tories will recover somewhat .
It’s historically correct as the author was a White from Kiev, so it’s in part autobiographical. It also shows how complicated Ukraine actually is, as the Hetmen I think come from Ukrainian time in Polish Lithuanian empire, so not popular with Ukrainian nationals, but the socialist Petliura is not popular with the Whites who would rather have the Tsar back in Moscow and not a Ukraine republic. but as the Bolsheviks close in the Socialist turn to the poles for help.
Plaid 26, Lab 23, Con 22, Reform 14, Green 7, LD 6
A veritable plethora of polling on offer today.
A lot to consider so just some immediate thoughts - the battle for third place in the popular (or less popular) vote seems to be tightening. While Reform are on 14% and four points ahead of the LDs with R&W, it's much closer with the other three polls - the YouGov MRP, Deltapoll and JL Partners. It may well be Farage's intervention will boost Reform - or it may not.
We know from the Clacton constituency poll the threat a Farage candidacy could have but the real message continues to be the collapse of the Conservative vote. In both the Clacton and the latter Godalming & Ash surveys, the Conservatives were down nearly a half on December 2019 - that ties in with a vote share of 25% in England.
I'm sceptical of MRP polls at this stage - even the ones taken in the last few days of the 2019 election were well out.
The more conventional polls remain all over the place to a degree - the Lab/LD/Green vs Con/Ref numbers tell a slightly different story.
R&W: 61-34, JL Partners 57-38, Deltapoll 62-34.
JL Partners still looks an outlier - James Johnson has put up an explanation as to why and how their numbers have changed so we'll see how this trend continues.
This is going to be a long month however you dress it up - it seems difficult to imagine the Conservative vote sinking into the teens but not inconceivable. Labour will of course take nothing for granted - they haven't got a single vote yet let alone a single seat.
Finally, it's worth repeating just because something has never happened doesn't mean it can't.
This probably has major repercussions for local government finances over the next couple of decades.
A lot of people leave things 1 or 2 years too late…
Though it was a commonwealth of the aristocracies - and what is now Ukraine had none.
https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/1797707375501283409
But it’s hard to gauge the impact of Farage. May not be as much as people expect.
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24712562/2024-05-31-report-and-recommendation-of-the-board-on-professional-responsibility.pdf
While a lot of other people are fit and better off in their own home.
And we're talking a difference of many decades in most cases between kids leaving home and being old enough to require a care home. I suspect most people who live in care homes today, their own grandchildren are old enough to require their own homes.
Seattle Times ($) - Boeing whistleblower has waited a decade for change, now expects to leave
For senior Boeing engineer and whistleblower Martin Bickeböller, a 37-year career at the jet maker is coming to a frustrating end.
For a decade, in complaints filed internally at Boeing as well as with the Federal Aviation Administration and Congress, Bickeböller documented significant shortfalls in Boeing’s quality control management at suppliers that build major sections of the 787 Dreamliner.
The FAA substantiated his claims in complaints in 2014 and 2021 and required Boeing to take corrective action. His latest complaint, submitted in January, alleges Boeing has not properly implemented the fixes it committed to after those earlier complaints.
Bickeböller doesn’t point to a single safety issue but rather to a systemically flawed oversight process.
He asserts that Boeing lacks control of the manufacturing processes at its suppliers to the extent that it cannot ensure — as safety regulations require — that every plane delivered meets design specifications.
On Thursday, Boeing presented a plan to the FAA for a comprehensive overhaul of its management of safety and quality. Bickeböller’s allegations suggest the necessary changes will have to reach deep into Boeing’s quality control systems throughout the supply chain.
And Bickeböller’s perception that he’s been penalized for his complaints underlines the difficulty of Boeing’s current effort to encourage employees to speak up about safety issues. . . .
Sunak should have called the election as soon as he took over. In hindsight Johnson should have gone in summer 2021...
(Actually less hindsight for one @CorrectHorseBattery who called the peak of Johnsonism)
We had a different version of that issue.
Dad declared he was going to die in the (quite isolated) house he and mum had renovated and been in for 35 years. And he did.
Which then took us 18 months to clear - it was big enough he never had to throw anything away. And a further 18 months to sell (2012-3).
So mum moved with me as 'carer' into a place within walking distance of everything needed, which served her well and I will be keeping it as I have long term diabetic complications to consider, which could potentially include impaired vision / mobility.
What I need is a 2nd home on the coast :-).
-
@jeremycorbyn
to get 8% in Islington N.
-
@georgegalloway
to get 3% in Rochdale.
Move along please, nothing to see here 👀
“TV debate coach who helped Rishi Sunak given £110,000 taxpayer-funded contract.”
https://x.com/Kevin_Maguire/status/1797720121592455203
@PippaCrerar
Oh dear. The Conservatives’ first election broadcast shows the union flag flying the wrong way up, which is a distress signal…
https://x.com/PippaCrerar/status/1797711070863466889
And it’s one of those uncanny valley items where the picture just looks wrong but you can’t quite work out why until it’s pointed out
The person sinking the Tories is Sunak, as today's JL poll shows. People really do not like him when they learn more about him.
Who’s the real slacker here, huh?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Thick_of_It_episodes
Luke Tryl
@LukeTryl
·
1h
Obviously many will think existential threat to the Tories a good thing & many problems are of their own making. A caution though is careful what you wish for. I think many of those most happy at a Tory implosion would dislike more the potential options for what replaces it
https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1797699289382264861
What next, 14 ounces to the pound and 16 pounds to the stone to be announced in the manifesto?
What is very strange is when we think about Sunak launch for leadership, it was super slick. The criticism was it was too slick and there were media pieces about his PR team all being very clever and savvy. And then people saw him in person in the debates and he was shit.
It is the family home and is far too big for us, but we will not move from it and indeed our children and grandchildren would do whatever they could to keep us in our home
Someday, maybe soon, a life changing event will happen to my wife and I, but even then it is possible our youngest may buy his siblings out and continue it as the family home
What's with the doom-laden Presbyterian Scot narrating it? Why isn't it Sunak?
And why doesn't it each feature real people?
Shit.
My grandad passed earlier this year, he was still living in his own home until 93 and was fit and healthy (for a 93 year old) until he suddenly deteriorated very fast. Cancer we're pretty certain but by the time it was discovered he was too frail to have a biopsy.
He never needed one, even in his nineties, but others can need one in their sixties or seventies. There's no hard and fast rules.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&q=jerome+murat#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:8ad4d393,vid:wkCmmuiDFcg,st:0
Tory candidates would be well advised to ignore them, keep their heads down, and concentrate on working their own patch as hard as they can.
South Thanet 2015 was a perfect result for him, close loss, he could argue that he would have won if the Tory machine hadn't cheated. But if he gets elected, then he'll be stuck at Westminster in the most depressing of positions, an opposition backbencher, he'll have to do constituency surgeries, actually handle people's problems. That doesn't sound like Farage stuff to me.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with you continuing to live in your family home, good for you. But other people also need family homes and that means we need massive construction, even without any population changes just due to demographic changes.
Do you mind if I ask how many years ago it was when your last child moved out of the home? Unlike in the past its not unusual now for people to live in what was their family home for decades beyond their children no longer living there and we need construction for the children to have somewhere to live.
Personally, I could never support it because the justice system is not infallible.
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24712562/2024-05-31-report-and-recommendation-of-the-board-on-professional-responsibility.pdf Only deadbeats like DJT - who have no intention of paying him anyway.
Very fortunately everything in the house - plumbing, roof, carpets, kitchen ... outlasted him by about a year, too.
https://www.tatler.com/article/who-is-cass-horowitz-rishi-sunak-special-advisor-social-media-guru
https://www.newstatesman.com/comment/2024/02/glossy-pr-rishi-sunak-cass-horowitz
On a serious note, these guys are from very privileged world. You can see why Cameron hired Coulson, an Essex lad from a normal background to tell him what to order at a Nandos.
Another way to look at it is that Gorgeous got just over twelve thousand votes in the by election. Unlike normal party candidates, it's not easy seeing him get more than that in a general election. And that's not enough to win.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/should-the-death-penalty-be-reintroduced-for-cases-of-multiple-murder?crossBreak=conservative
As for constituency surgeries and the like, who's going to punish them for outsourcing it?
Swinney getting his arse handed to him
Tory Party loves to panic.
Tories have been tacking hard right to see off RefUK. Thought they had caught the Nigel on the hop.
Tory campaign heavily set in winning over Fukkers and wayward Tories. Forget your common or garden Tory, and especially forget your 2019 first time red wall Tory, this is hang em and flog em only.
Various mad policy announcements have gone down like a bucke of warm sick - National Service a prime example.
Despite this that Tory chasm remains gargantuan. It isn't working
Now The Nigel (for it is He) comes back. On a mission to become the next leader of the Conservative Party. Sunak in a mad panic will now try and tack even harder to the right to see him off.
The madder the Tories get, the harder they lose. They can't out fUK RefUK, and in trying they lose even more of middle England.
And this is why the Nigel is manna from heaven for the Liberal Democrats. The Tories will unveil ever madder and more repugnant policies over the remaining month, and that just lets us pick up more seats.